Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

atreides1

(16,799 posts)
3. Yes it is.
Mon Sep 8, 2014, 09:15 PM
Sep 2014

blockade, an act of war by which a belligerent prevents access to or departure from a defined part of the enemy’s coasts.

Blockades are regulated by international customary law and by international treaty law. A blockade must be declared in advance by notification of all neutral powers, and it must be applied impartially against ships of all states. Mere declarations of a blockade or “paper blockades,” common in the 18th and early 19th centuries, have no legal effect; the blockading state must make the blockade effective by maintaining naval or air forces in the area in sufficient strength to prevent ingress or egress from the enemy’s ports. Once the blockade ceases to be effectively maintained, the legal state of blockade lapses and can only be reestablished by due notification and enforcement.

Penalties for breach of blockade are seizure of ship and cargo and their possible condemnation as lawful prize. Neutral ships may not be destroyed for blockade running.

The law of blockade, in common with other laws of war, has evolved historically to meet the needs of major powers. The development of submarines and aircraft, in particular, made it impossible to station blockading warships in constant positions off an enemy’s coasts to maintain close blockades, and it has subsequently been accepted that long-range blockades (maintained by naval forces out of sight of the enemy’s coast) are legal if they effectively prevent ingress and egress.

There is little legal authority, however, by which the meaning of “effective blockade” may be precisely defined under conditions of modern naval warfare. There is authority for the view that risk of seizure for ships running the blockade must be substantial, entailing the presence of patrolling ships

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Is a blockade of a port an act of war? [View all] Duckhunter935 Sep 2014 OP
It's a warning fadedrose Sep 2014 #1
Voted "no" because I believe it depends on the conditions, the details. NYC_SKP Sep 2014 #2
Impeding an economy can be part of a starvation tactic to soften a target for war DireStrike Sep 2014 #4
Please see line #2 of my reply. nt NYC_SKP Sep 2014 #5
"suffering and strife" are ill defined terms. DireStrike Sep 2014 #8
No, it is literally an act of war. Scootaloo Sep 2014 #13
Loose the Hounds, then! NYC_SKP Sep 2014 #16
Well, just making hte point, it's a term with a legal definition Scootaloo Sep 2014 #21
We agree! NYC_SKP Sep 2014 #22
Yes it is. atreides1 Sep 2014 #3
Yes it is. AngryAmish Sep 2014 #6
If a nation moves forces into the territorial waters of another to blockade the port... Kaleva Sep 2014 #7
Is this in reference to Calais? William769 Sep 2014 #9
The erectile dysfunction medication? Kaleva Sep 2014 #10
... William769 Sep 2014 #11
I am keeping an eye on you. AngryAmish Sep 2014 #12
... leftstreet Sep 2014 #15
Oh YOU NuclearDem Sep 2014 #18
no, this Duckhunter935 Sep 2014 #14
Thanks. I should have guessed some more shit that Russia is pulling. William769 Sep 2014 #17
Your day will get better Duckhunter935 Sep 2014 #19
Thank you for the context. NYC_SKP Sep 2014 #20
JFK and his advisors thought so. longship Sep 2014 #23
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Is a blockade of a port a...»Reply #3